Baker Lake Sockeye fishery

The Baker Lake sockeye fishery is going to be Agenda item #14 discussion item at the WDFW Commission meeting on Saturday, December 14 at 9 a.m. The meeting will be held at the Holiday Inn & Suites, 4260 Mitchell Way Bellingham, WA 98226, Room Chuckanut.

Frank Urabeck and others have been trying to work with WDFW staff to get some equity and opportunity for the sport fishing community that has enjoyed the Baker Lake sockeye fishery in years past. The anticipated/requested support has not been forthcoming. Frank has outlined the issues below.

If you live in the area and can attend the meeting you can present your input to the Commission.

Thanks



AGENDA ITEM #14 Baker Lake and Skagit River Sockeye Salmon Review

Key sport fishing groups, including PSA, CCA and the Steelhead Trout Club have worked together since 2014 to address Baker sockeye harvest inequity favoring the Skagit Basin tribes the past six out of seven years. Since a peak run of 53,000 sockeye in 2015 the return to the Skagit River has plummeted to less than half this number to only 22,000 this year. In 2019 the Skagit Basin tribes harvested 8,700 sockeye. Sports anglers harvested 580 in the Skagit River and just 2,800 were released into Baker Lake for recreational fishing – only about 50—60% expected to be harvested. During those seven years nearly 29,000 more sockeye were harvested by the tribes than made available for recreational harvest.

With the crash of the once popular Lake Washington sockeye fishery in 2007, and more recently the disappearance of the Columbia River sockeye fishery out of Brewster, Washington, the Skagit River and Baker Lake recreational sockeye fisheries provide the remaining recreation opportunity in the state for these popular salmon. While only a relatively few sockeye are taken by hook and line from the Skagit River, Baker Lake is where most of the sport fishing takes place. On some peak activity days in 2018 as many as 150 --200 boats ranging from kayaks to 20-foot jet sleds trolled the lake. In 2015 over 19,000 sockeye were put into the lake for sport harvest, compared with 2,800 in 2019 that produced the worst fishery since PSE began releasing sockeye into Baker Lake in 2010. Also, broodstock requirements were barely met.

We were promised by department staff at an October 20, 2018 public workshop on the Baker Lake harvest inequity issue, held in Mill Creek, that harvest inequity would be addressed by the co-managers. This did not happen.

We again are asking that the Commission direct the Department to give Baker sockeye harvest equity a high priority for the 2020 season, engaging the three Skagit Basin tribes on behalf of sport fishing license holders in a transparent manner that allows the public to track the discussions. This should be accomplished before NOF 2020 gets started. Options that should be on the table include (a)use of a pre-season run forecast buffer as has been done on the Columbia River, (b) following year payback via harvest adjustments, and (c) use of professional judgement to adjust the pre-season forecast resulting from the current run forecast model that missed the mark by over 11,000 sockeye in 2019.

An extrapolation of the actual sockeye run estimates from 2015 through 2019 would suggest that the 2020 run will be less than 20,000. Informal guesstimate by department technical staff is a pre-season run forecast for 2020 in the mid-30,000 range. Whenever the actual run is less than the pre-season forecast the tribes wind up with more sockeye.

If Puget Sound marine waters salmon fishing in 2020 is even more restricted than it was this year (2019), then Baker Lake may be one of the few places salmon anglers can troll in 2020. Many sport fishing license holders are giving serious thought to leaving this sport. We must have a reason to continue our license purchases and we will only do that if fishing opportunities are provided. The Baker Lake sockeye fishery is an important component.

It is very important that the public show up at this Commission meeting and engage with the Commission and Department of Fish and Wildlife staff by demanding that harvest equity be achieved in 2020.

If you can’t attend, your comments can be sent to the Wildlife Commission at commission@dfw.wa.gov and should also be cc’d to Director Kelly Susewind, Kelly.Susewind@dfw.wa.gov; Fish Policy Director Ron Warren Ron.Warren@dfw.wa.gov; and Assistant Director for Fisheries Kelly Cunningham Kelly.Cunningham@dfw.wa.gov.

I'm planning to attend to testify on a broader range of subject material that SPORTFISHING MATTERS. If the Baker agenda item has its own public comment opportunity I'll speak to that as well. Equaitable adjustment isn't that hard.

Oh wait! It is that hard for WDFW. Cuz WDFW must cave to any tribal demand at NOF or risk no agreement and no opportunity to piggy-back on the tribal/BIA section 7 consultation permit they get from NMFS.

It’s absolutely amazing that Mr. Urabeck says “We again are asking that the Commission direct the Department to give Baker sockeye harvest equity a high priority for the 2020 season, engaging the three Skagit Basin tribes on behalf of sport fishing license holders in a transparent manner that allows the public to track the discussions. This should be accomplished before NOF 2020 gets started.”

First, someone should look into the “secret negotiations” that took place with WDFW staff, a certain Assistant Attorney General and Mr. Urabeck with members of the Skokomish tribe over Baker lake Sockeye eggs.

Second, the idea that the Commission would be moved by the public “asking them” to “direct” the department to “engage” the basin tribes ON BEHALF OF LICENSED RECREATIONAL FISHERMEN for equality is laughable. Not to mention that he thinks those conversations would be “transparent”, that “ALLOWS” the public to track the discussion.

All the best Frank...sure wish you would of seen the light and had chosen to publicly speak out about equality, transparency and the danger of Secret Meetings back in 2015.

PSE should just stop production. The tribes can put that in their pipe and smoke it.

RnG, PSE can't just stop production. The Baker fisheries program is part of a larger mitigation program that PSE is required to provide in compliance with terms of its FERC license.

The issue is not sockeye production, but rather the harvest of surplus sockeye. That is the purview of the co-managers. And that's just fine. The only problem in co-management is that all the shots are being called by one co-manager, and that ain't WDFW.

Yeah, it's not co-management unless it is Co.

It may be lively at that Commission meeting next week in Bellingham.

The Baker Lake issues is being discussed. Here is the live feed link:

Live Baker discussion

Audio cut out right when it got to public comments.

Now everything cut out. Says "Stand by"

Can anybody provide the gist of the public comments?

Other than my remarks which described some of the history of Baker sockeye restoration, most of the public comment complained about the unequal sharing of harvest the last 3 years. The tribes got something like 2/3 and the sports got 1/3, instead of 50:50. However, in years when the run is under-predicted, the sports harvest more than the tribes. Recent forecasts over-predicted actual abundance, so the opposite occurred.

Frankly, it kinda' chaps my butt to hear sport fishermen whining about this year's "poor" return of 22,000 sockeye. Historically we estimate that the Baker sockeye run topped out at 20,000 and averaged some lower number.

With the improved juvenile fish collectors that have been operating since 2008 and 2012, average runsizes are much larger since 2010 than ever occurred in history. I'm just happy that people have too many sockeye to complain about and fight over now adays.

History lessons are always good. Baker has one of the better data sets as it goes back to pre-dam with the Fed Hatchery up there.

They mentioned that the audio went out for about 20 minutes but said it was all recorded. Anyone have/find a link to that recording?

Where can we find historical data regarding overall run size and sport/tribal harvest share?

I see trap counts on https://wdfw.wa.gov/fishing/reports/counts/baker-river, but it doesn't say anything about total returns or harvest shares.

https://wdfw.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-12/14_baker_sockeye_commission_briefing_121419final.pdf

Here is the presentation and there is a slide that shows harvest share.

Thanks. That's useful info.

During the first few years of this fishery it was almost too good to be true, and like most things that appear that way, it was.

At least I can say I was there when it was at its best.

I am 38. Every fishery I ever figured has gone this way. It was too good to last.

The Baker system appears likely to remain productive for the foreseeable future. If ocean survival rates are reasonable, I expect to see good returns as well. Smolt to adult survival rates have been as high as 12%, but we know better than to expect that to be the long-term norm. Even at 5% we will have very good returns. When it drops to 2%, maybe not so much. What is easy to lose track of is that 2% is just as normal as 12% in the grand scheme of things.

What I don't get is why people talk about years with 12,000 to 14,000 trapped as great fishing years, and the last few years with 16,000 to 25,000 trapped as not-so-good. Are we culling the biters? Just too many fisherman? Just nostalgia for the "good ol days?"

I've only fished it the last three years, and it was always hit or miss for me (although this last year was our best year yet, despite the falling numbers).

I don't honestly know what the difference is but the first 2 years the fish were hot to bite. The first season with only about 10k fish in the lake it was double and triple hookups and we ran standard Lake WA bare hooks gear. Early and easy limits were the norm. The next year was equally stupendous but each subsequent year the fish became increasingly finicky despite what seemed to be good catchable numbers, even in excess of those first pilot years.

Edit, thinking about it I think there was actually closer to around 4,000 fish in the lake the first trip I made down there in the first season. It was very very productive fishing.

I agree that initially the Baker sockeye were pretty good biters for sockeye.

A couple things have changed since those first couple years. First the fleet as whole as become much better at catching those sockeye that would bite. As a result the biting fish are removed more quickly but on the plus side the are being spread over a higher portion of the fleet.

The second factor might be more critical. The brood stock is always collected at the Baker trap. The first couple years that meant that all the brood stock was collected before the population was exposed to a hook and line fishery - no selection against that portion of the population that for what ever reason were willing to bite. Now there is an in-river recreational fishery targeting those sockeye before they get to the trap or before brood stock is collected. While the over all in-river recreational catch is pretty small it is unknown whether that is affecting future generations of sockeyes wellness to bite. Do know when that in-river fishery was being first being considered that potential impact was discussed.

Curt

So you are saying that the biters get caught. Then the non biters are the only ones that reproduce so a few generations down the road all you have is non biters?

Only time I have had luck in the river is when the water is up a little. Been really low the last few years.

Curt

I remember those discussions at the time, I think you even brought that up at one of early Baker Lake meetings at Mill Creek when they were discussing opening the river to sportsman.

The second year it was open I used my underwater camera mounted on my downrigger to find fish the day before it opened.

We used several different hookless offerings behind a dodger, we were amazed at how aggressive these fish were, some would follow the hoochie for 10 minutes repeatedly attacking it.

In Lake Washington the sockeye would follow it, then, maybe gently mouth it once, and swim away. And most fish just looked at it.

Just curious,

Has anyone heard any meeting schedules between the Three Skagit Basin tribes, where the pubic (you and I) can see and hear what's being talked about?

Remember, this was one of the emphasized points in Mr. Urabecks request.

"We again are asking that the Commission direct the Department to give Baker sockeye harvest equity a high priority for the 2020 season, engaging the three Skagit Basin tribes on behalf of sport fishing license holders in a transparent manner that allows the public to track the discussions.."

Bay wolf,

WDFW will do whatever the Skagit tribes tell them to do. Because they can. And because WDFW doesn't do anything to change the co-management imbalance. Maybe they like having the tribes tell them how to manage fisheries. That way, they don't have to figure stuff out on their own. OK, that last sentence is just plain cynicism and sarcasm on my part. WDFW has more than enough technical expertise, but the policy wonks either lack expertise or the will to do something about it.

It should be obvious that there are bigger things at play. WDFW is (likely) under direction to accommodate the Tribes. Regardless of the technical issues, they have agreed to "something". I do believe that the plan that WDFW (thanks Phil) has agreed to for PS is that marine fisheries in the ocean are first priority, the Straits second, and the rest can just whither and die.

They have also accepted that ESA listings are entirely the fault of the NI side and that the NI side has taken its share of harvest as development.